Voting from afar: Lebanon’s diaspora and the fight for political influence

Lebanon’s debate over electoral reform continues to circle back to one unresolved question, The future of expatriate voting. While the controversy is far from new, the latest cabinet session has brought it sharply back into focus, exposing both the political sensitivity of the issue and the persistent deadlock surrounding it.

What Is the “Expatriate File”?

In 2017, parliament amended the electoral law to allow expatriates to vote from abroad. For the 2018 elections, they could cast ballots only in their home districts. By 2022, however, a crucial precedent was set: for the first time, Lebanese abroad were allowed to vote for all 128 parliamentary seats, rather than just the six seats previously reserved for the diaspora.

The impact was immediate. Turnout among expatriates rose, and their ballots added a new, independent weight to the electoral map. For many, the diaspora became a corrective force against Lebanon’s entrenched political elites.

After 2022, the full-parliament diaspora vote faced strong political resistance, technical obstacles, and legislative delays. This combination effectively rolled back the practical ability of expatriates to vote for all seats, even if the law hasn’t been formally reversed.

Now, ahead of the 2026 elections, the government has yet to decide whether expatriates can vote for the full parliament or must be limited to the symbolic six-seat allotment. At its last meeting, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam floated a technical fix replacing the abandoned “magnetic card” with a simplified QR code system, but the cabinet sidestepped the central issue of diaspora voting. To observers, this looked less like reform than a deliberate attempt to postpone confrontation.

Why It Matters

Lebanon’s diaspora is not a peripheral constituency. In fact, it is estimated to outnumber the population inside the country. Their remittances sustain the economy, their professional networks carry influence, and their votes embody both symbolic legitimacy and practical power.

Allowing expatriates full participation is seen as essential to rebuilding trust in a political system hollowed out by corruption, collapse, and crisis. Restricting or rescinding their vote, on the other hand, risks deepening alienation among a community that already feels abandoned by the state.

Division over expatriate voices

Proponents of full diaspora voting, including civil society movements and the Lebanese Forces party, argue that it expands representation, promotes accountability, and entrenches democracy in Lebanon's global reality. They warn that any attempt to roll back diaspora participation is nothing short of an assault on political rights.

By contrast, Amal and Hezbollah prefer to limit expatriates to six specific seats. They cite logistical and administrative burdens, though critics assert that the real concern is political. Diaspora voices often lean toward sovereign powers, weakening traditional blocs that are still trying to dominate domestic politics.

More than just a technical dispute

At stake is much more than just a procedure. The battle over the diaspora vote reveals the deeper question of who will shape Lebanon's political future. Will the votes of millions abroad be fully counted, or will they be reduced to a symbolic gesture?

The expatriates are an integral part of the country, and their roots should be free and no less important than the Lebanese in Lebanon. One identity, one faith, and political reform is everyone's responsibility